Persuasive Essay On Jury Duty

Juries mostly sit in the Crown Court; if a defendant pleads not guilty, he will be tried by a judge sitting with 12 jurors. Due to numerous cases of jury misconduct being brought to light, serious questions about jury trials are being augmented. To an extent, this is compromising people’s confidence in the jury system. Jury misconduct can be explained as an infringement of the law of the court by a member of the jury, either while a court case is underway or after a verdict is out.

A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment.

The United States should have national service programs, but participation should be voluntary. There are many services that people can do. Each that fits someone’s likings. However, if you don’t like what you’re doing you won’t do it your highest abilities. People who choose to do it tend to do better than people who are forced to do it because they want to do it.

The criminal justice system faces multiple accusations for not standing up to the “innocent until proven guilty” standards. While the legal system has fought to keep this statement true, the challenges still exist. One of these is a proper trial that is both unbiased and without error. The setting for a proper trial includes an impartial jury selection to follow the proper procedures of the courtroom. Selection of the jury is an important task and serving on a jury is considered by the United States as the civic duty of the community.

The judiciary is an independent arm of the government that ought to operate without influence or threats from the government or any other organization. The independence of the judiciary ensures it executes legal matters without bias and within the jurisdiction of the law. In England, sources of law include “legislation, common law, and European Union law” (Judiciary.gov.uk, 2016 n.d). Juries play significant roles in ensuring fair trials within the legal framework of the country’s constitution. Juries became an integral part of the judicial system as early as 1215 the same year that Magna Carta acknowledged the right to free trial through judgment by peers.

On July 14th 2015 I sat on a jury in a criminal case for State of Florida v John Doe (I do not remember defendants name). John Doe was charged with assault with a deadly weapon for pulling a knife on a man and cutting him twice with the blade. To begin with, I showed up at 8AM to the courthouse hoping that I would not be selected to be on a jury. The first set of jurors was selected and low and behold

Upon doing some research on the quote I found out that was is written in number nine is not actually the quote, nor is it the context that Benjamin Franklin met it in. The actual quote is “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” Ironically enough this quote was met very literally to a situation that Benjamin Franklin was writing about. The quote was a part of a letter written in 1755 on behalf of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the colonial governor.

As a citizen of the United States it is our obligation to serve on a jury when we are called. It is our duty to be apart of a panel and directly participate in the judicial process. Your decision can ultimately determine one’s life so it’s important to understand the facts from myths. What happens when someone pleas not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI)? What does that mean?

The fifth amendment to the United States constitution should remain just as it is, meaning that no person should be forced to provide incriminating evidence against themselves. And to do so would go against the natural law of self preservation. But by not compelling a person to provide evidence against themselves offers one relief from perjury in order to preserve themselves. The speaker equates not answering to lying which is incorrect, the speakers strawman example of not answering a spouse is an untruth and is an unrealistic example.

Which amendments focus on the rights of people accused of crimes? What rights do these amendments guarantee? The Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment focuses on the rights of people accused of crimes. The Fifth Amendment protects an accused citizen of self incrimination and double jeopardy.